Media Appearance: Kudlow & Company (1/27/06)



Tonight’s appearance will be Kudlow & Company, and I am scheduled to be on from 5:00 to 6:00 pm. Also appearing: Supply Side Art Laffer, Chief Economist for Mesirow Financial Diane Swonk, Raymond Learsy, and Jed Babbin.

There were some rumors wirling around sometime about Diane being appointed to the Federal reserve . . .


UPDATE: January 28, 2006  6:19am

Lots of email and comments about the show — and people continue to ask "why do it." Aside from the obvious, there’s plenty of good explanations:

1) I may disagree with his politics (I’m a pragmatic independent) but he is an extremely bright and engaging guy; Off camera, Larry is utterly charming and guileless; The on camera bluster is just "show bidness;"

2) I try to keep my appearances on any show I’m on reality based. So when 2 other panelists claim "There is no inflation" I do not try to convince them — instead, I want the viewers to think: "No inflation? These dolts are clueless — let me listen to what that fat bastard is saying."

3) Of all the people who are not in the conservative camp (me), I can get Larry to actually listen to alternative arguments — he knows I was Bullish on Oil since 12/03, and on Gold for even longer — so when I say there is a real chance of market dislocation, it get his attention.  And he is well aware that almost nobody else on Wall Street is saying this. He’s been around long enough to know when everyone is on one side of the boat . . . 

4) He’s definitely come around (somewhat) on the more egregious examples of the Administration’s incompetence. Especially with spending and deficits, but on New Orleans and Iraq also.

5) Speaking of Mess O’Potamia:   The subtext of Jed Babbin’s comments is that if we weren’t so tied down in Iraq, we would have the free hand needed to address confront Iran — a soon to be nuclear power. So the f%&@ up in Iraq  becomes a National Security issue . . 

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

What's been said:

Discussions found on the web:
  1. Franklin Delano Sinatra commented on Jan 27

    Larry Krudblow? Barry, do you have to take any drugs to dumb yourself down for that one?

    Why on earth does Barry not have a show? Then again, it would be too thoughtful, detailed, and fact-based.

  2. KirkH commented on Jan 27

    I watched the Barrified Kudlow&Co and have to say I was pretty impressed. He had some beleivers by the end of the show. Kudlow’s on my Tivo schedule now, blog readers can’t be hurting the ratings.

  3. spencer commented on Jan 28

    The guys on Kudlow talking about taking out Iran were the same ones that told us 3 years ago that Iraq would be a cakewalk.

    So why should they be any more right now then 3 years ago?

  4. danny commented on Jan 28

    I hadn’t seen you on the tube in a while, B.

    You were awesome — I like how you keep your cool and sustain a sort of “Falstaffian wit.”

    FYI, those comments about “Fed tests” were dead on.

    I’m not as a bearish as you are, but you ALWAYS have something intelligent to say….

    have a good weekend.

  5. Ronny Sivils commented on Jan 5

    Larry Kudlow:
    This is in regards to your column in the Kansas City Star of 01-04-07 regarding John Edwards. Do you really think it will matter who is in the Whitehouse? They can only do what the Senate and the Congress and the people let them. And even if the Democrats win in 2008 it’s still going to take us 10 years to get out of Iraq. And don’t forget the Democrats voted for us to go there to.

  6. Jim Beck commented on Aug 29

    I enjoy Kudlow’s program very much, but I wish he would allow his guests to fully express themselves. When he disagrees, he runs over his guests as if they don’t know what they’re talking about. As a listener I’m interested to hear the opposing view. I understand the rapid -fire style designed to make the dialogue active, but give the guest a chance. Don’t tell him he doesn’t know what he’s talking about.

  7. abe commented on Sep 25

    Larry;I try to catch your show whenever i can.Most of the time i enjoy it.The one thing that baffles me is when the subject of socisl security comes up there is no answers.To me it is very simple.First of all these same people who destroyed it in the first place are now being asked to fix it. The social security program is the only govt. program that ever created a surplus on it’s own.Had it been left alone there would be enough momey now to pay off our national debt.Our then president Johnson could not stand to seeso much money siting idle and with the help of both parties of congress they proceded to put it where it now stands.Their usual answers are to raise taxes,or raise the retirament age.There is only one way to save it is to reverse the process and return soc sec to the people and each year pay off those notes gathering dust one year at the time and invest the monies in interest producing investments and before long it would be solvent on its own.One more thing would be to allow a portion of the peoples money to be invested outside of the soc.sec system incase someone would die before reaching retirament age.thank you. AbeZieff

  8. abe zieff commented on Oct 3

    Larry,I see you posted my comments on soc. sec on your message board .Now i would like to see some answers from some of our elected officials on why we have to use this money to pay the rich farmers not to grow anything on their land. I also know that many members of congress own these farms and vote themselves these subsidies. This should not be allowed.I would like some comments from them.Thanks again Abe

  9. John Daugherty commented on Oct 4

    On your show of 10/4/2007 one of your guests, in the debate on income differences, said the government needed to give low income people money for education.
    My question is: Don’t we still have night school? When I started working I enrolled in night school, and after nine and one half years I had a degree. I later was in the upper 2% of income earners in the U S!

Posted Under